What's it about? Peter Parker, orphaned as a young boy, now living with his Uncle Ben and Aunt May is trying to get by at school. One day, during a visit to a gene-splicing facility run by Dr Curt Connors, he is bitten by a spider and everything changes - super powers abound, as do tragedy, trials and adventure.
*****
What's it like? It has only been ten years since the last time the Spider-man franchise was launched and a mere five years since the curtain came down on Sam Raimi's very successful trilogy with the flawed but entertaining Spider-man 3 (you know, with Sandman, Venom and all that stuff). Some would say that it is too soon to re-launch with another origin story, especially with it touching on the same bases as last time around - same school bully (Flash), same spider, same powers, same character arcs - but to its credit this manages to be its own creature. Reverting to the comic-book web-shooters instead of Raimi's organic version, giving us Gwen Stacey as Parker's love and trying to give a more over-arching story regarding the fate of Parker's parents all help put clear water between this and the Raimi/Maguire trilogy.
Director Mark Webb (whose last film was the excellent (500) Days of Summer) handles action and character beats with aplomb, even if the villain (Connors turns into Lizard as a result of trying to re-grow his lost arm) suffers from a cut in the special effects budget this time around (Spider-man 3 cost $300m, this a mere $80m). The film takes its time in moving through Parker's story arc and Andrew Garfield, despite being 28, makes for a far more convincing nerdy high school kid than Tobey Maguire ever did. The chemistry between Parker and Emma Stone's Gwen Stacey is affecting and perhaps the most successful aspect of the film, although Garfield deserves kudos for delivering Spider-man's witty quips even through the limitations of a spandex suit.
An improvement on the first and third Spider-man films but falling short of Spider-man 2 (though there is no shame in that) this is excellent entertainment and has a little to say as well. Well worth your time.
Director Mark Webb (whose last film was the excellent (500) Days of Summer) handles action and character beats with aplomb, even if the villain (Connors turns into Lizard as a result of trying to re-grow his lost arm) suffers from a cut in the special effects budget this time around (Spider-man 3 cost $300m, this a mere $80m). The film takes its time in moving through Parker's story arc and Andrew Garfield, despite being 28, makes for a far more convincing nerdy high school kid than Tobey Maguire ever did. The chemistry between Parker and Emma Stone's Gwen Stacey is affecting and perhaps the most successful aspect of the film, although Garfield deserves kudos for delivering Spider-man's witty quips even through the limitations of a spandex suit.
An improvement on the first and third Spider-man films but falling short of Spider-man 2 (though there is no shame in that) this is excellent entertainment and has a little to say as well. Well worth your time.
*****
Should I see it? That depends on whether this is your sort of thing, I suppose. There is no strong language as far as I can recall and although Lizard and Spidey have a few pretty meaty scraps, the violence is kept the right side of the film's 12A certificate. Lizard would be unlikely to scare or upset anyone other than the very young, though the theme of losing parents may be hard to process for the young as well. Thematically, the ideas of coping with school, standing up to bullies, using your strength and opportunities responsibly and protecting the vulnerable are all worth examining and talking through with family and friends and so the film presents a opportunity to dive into that realm. There are deeper, more meaningful films out there, but this is far from a superficial exercise. Watch it and engage with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment